if people would have actually listened to calorie counting advice they would'nt be so fucking fat, I've lost 50lbs through a 500 kcal deficit doing little to no exercise. you are cancer get off the internet.
Wait, so if dave still consumes more calories than he "needs" he won't lose weight, but calorie theory at the same time is wrong? 10/10 for making me comment
^ that guy said it, the laws of thermodynamics. Calories are energy
Fat is stored energy, Fat is stored calories
HOW DO I BURN STORED ENERGY?!?"?"?
Well if I eat less calories than my body burns, where will I get the extra calories to burn guize?!?!?! I KNOW FROM THE STORED FAT.
GODDAMIT WOMAN ARE YOU DISABLED? just because "this advice has been around and people aren't following it and getting fatter anyway" doesn't mean it is wrong. LRN2THERMODYNAMICS
Wow, if you were a real scientist you would be fired within the first 3 minutes. Your rant in the whole first minute is absolutely wrong. You are not showing any evidence that the spread of two different things are interrelated. Learn the scientific method and come back with some real proof, not some fad diet to make you a bit of money and give you you're 15 minutes of fame.
what are your credentials that make you qualified to be spouting off information that's contrary to that given by the FDA?
agreed, simple calorie in < calorie out doesn't work for SOME people.
but to say that calorie counting isn't the best way to lose weight for MANY people is simply wrong. I know people that have lost huge amounts of weight by eating less and exercising, NOT by just cutting carbs. lrn2thermodynamics.
what a horrible video, i love how shes trying to disprove chemistry. fat is your body's way of storing calories. if you take in more calories than you need those are stored as fat, if you take in less than you eat you fat deposits are tapped to make up for the deficit. she doesn't even understand that when the it says 500 calories less it means 500 calories less than what your body needs not how much you regularly consume. my favorite is how she says men lose more weight, that's a real myth.
I wouldn't say calories is not the answer - that implies that energy consumption is not a factor.
What I might say is that for some individuals who are accustomed to certain responses to caloric deficit, that sufficient caloric deficit to lose weight at a noticeable rate is difficult to maintain, because a slight caloric deficit causes disproportionate response in satiety.
That said, calorie in < calorie out does eventually cause noticeable mass loss.
i laughed while watchin' this i mean its so funny what 'MAD' advice we get about calories! it was funny how zoe made total sense! i really love her videos she is awesome! :D
@UKMark1997 If U think the calorie deficit formula does work Please can u prove it!? Whats The Science Behind It? Zoe wrote to goverment buddies that use this(mad) formula and asked for a proof!! NONE of em could!!! So Please wil ya?? Thanks a lot!!!
iv been fat all my life and it got really bad 330 pounds
then i whent on the atkins diet a diet of like 65% fat , 30% protein , 5% carbs and with exercise i lost 150 pounds of fat and gained 60 pounds of muscle
im now 240 pounds and your right counting calories is stupid i dont count calories at all i eat as much food as i want as long as its none of the bad carbs :)
Hi VeoKenKs - well done! Great diagnosis and great job choosing something that works for you. I'm a big fan of the real food bit of Atkins - I don't like the processed low carb bars & things giving us rubbish in a different way. If we all base our diet on meat, fish, eggs, dairy products, salads and vegetables (for me - sal & veg should be UNlimited), but I do understand the rationale behind this. Fruit and whole grains should then be eaten with caution!
It is true that blanket advice of 'Eat 500 cals less per day' will not lead to regular weight loss of 1lb per week for a lot of people for various reasons e.g.they're not eating at maintenance levels to start with, their energy output might downregulate to some extent due to a calorie deficit, they may expend less calories through activity through lethargy etc. But this doesn't mean that the basic 3500 cals theory is wrong.
It just means that for various reasons either the input or output side of the calorie balance equation can change and so you may not ACTUALLY be achieving the calorie deficit you think you are theoretically. Also, dieting doesn't 'damage' metabolic rate permanently, only a small amount due to less energy output due to the lower bodyweight. But this will be balanced by an equivalent reduction in appetite.
The low success rate of dieting is not due to a failure of dieting methods per se, simply that people who have got fat in the first place find it hard to permanently leave behind the eating habits or sedentary habits that got them there in the first place. Many people do manage to diet and keep weight off long term through making regular exercise a part of their lives.
I await with interest to see if you are able to provide any figures that show a higher success rate with your program. On your forums I see a lot of people who struggle to stick to your program or are achieving no or little weight loss success, and of course no one is able to give adequate help to them to explain their lack of success as you have no alternative theory to explain fat loss having dismissed the calorie theory. I see no evidence that your program is getting superior results.
Zoe, I never count calories. For years I've eaten all the meats, vegetables and some fresh citrus fruits that I instinctively want. I've been able to maintain ~ 5% to 8% body fat for over a decade (I'm a male). What's interesting is that I was a heavily overweight person growing up. Again, I never count calories. I just eat wholesome, unaltered foods.
Hello again! Well done you for this - I see so many clients and I ask them when their weight problem first started and I have yet to meet someone who didn't say "When I started my first calorie restricted diet/went to Weight Watchers for the first time" etc.
It starts the body down that never ending spiral of being hungry, wanting to eat more and to do less - the exact opposite of what eating less tries to do!
Eat better - it's the only way - as a fit guy like you knows!
Hi Zoe. You say that the government advice is to "Reduce your intake by 3,500 calories to lose a pound of fat." It says "Whenever we eat more than our body needs, we put on weight" and "Ideally, you need to eat 500-600 calories FEWER THAN YOUR DAILY CALORIE NEEDS in order to lose a healthy 0.5kg/1lb per week" So for Dave to lose a pound in a week he would need 500 kcal a day fewer than 3,000. I didn't do maths at Cambridge, but I make that 2,500 kcal a day. Methinks your argument is flawed!
Hi there - you're right! According to the calorie theory (which I don't believe) the government should have said Dave should eat 500 cals a day less than he needs. Several official references to this formula forget the 'deficit' bit and just say 'eat less' - not 'eat less than you need'. I'm having a bit of a pop at them not even getting their own advice right. Far more serious is that I have asked 6 official sources where is the evidence for this 3500 thing and they have no idea! Zoe x
Of course if Dave is eating many more calories than he needs he's not going to lose weight, if one wants to lose a pound a week you need to eat -500 calories of your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). Also the whole car example is incorrect, the fat we have stored is energy, if we eat with a calorie deficit we get the rest from the fat, we still need food though for nutrients which are not stored in fat. So starving is bad, but eating less is good, once the goal is reached than you eat what's needed.
well i have strictly counting calories for everything that i eat, and not only that, but i make sure that most of those calories come from whole foods, and things like that, and I have lost plenty of weight....so in my opinion CALORIE COUNTING WORKS!!!!!! of course if you eat nothing but mcdonalds and count calories, or cookies all day then of course it's going to be harder...so just count calories, and make sure those calories just come from good whole foods and you will be alright
Hi there - I sincerely hope you are one of the c. 5% of people who lose weight on a low calorie diet and keep it off. You are very likely to have slowed your metabolism and got your body used to needing fewer calories, which means you may need to eat very little for the rest of your life to stay at this weight. You may also have picked up the 3 conditions described in the book (and other VT's) and start getting cravings. I would rather eat more personally!
i dont think so.I do alot of cardio during the day so then whatever calories I burn doing the cardio i end up eating that much more...alot of times I find it hard to even eat the number of calories i have set for myself, so I am in no way starving myself. Not even close to it in fact...just got done eating 3 full chicken breasts and a salad, and i still got about 800 calories left for the day.of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I really do believe that this method has worked wonders!
So it dont matter how many calories i intake as long as im eating proteins n vegs? can i eat like 3pieces of grilled chicken instead of 2 n not worry? or is there a limit? im so confused as i know the right foods i just dont know the portions or which not to eat n when
What you're saying is true, although you appear just to be quoting statistics, e.g the outbreak of obesity linked to counting calories. I believe this is mostly due to people failing their calorie controlled diets and eating more.
Also, I believe you have to eat 3500 less than your required daily intake to lose a pound of fat. So Dave will not lose weight but continue to gain it. But he will be gaining 2lb less fat than he was previously.
Hi! Thanks so much for your thought provoking comment.
Since my last videos all I've been doing is research. The UK Government statistics state we were eating 2290 calories per person per day in 1975 and 1690 in 1999. Applying the 3500 calorie 'rule', each person should have LOST 62.6lbs during that time. Instead obesity increased 6X. So we are not falling off our diets and eating more - we are eating lots less and getting fatter. It must be WHAT we eat , not how much, that counts. Zoe x
Me again - on the Dave thing - I don't believe that Dave would have been gaining 4lbs every week (i.e. 208lbs every year). I am in the group (and there are a few writing in obesity journals) that believes it is WHAT we eat, not how much, that counts. I believe that if Dave were eating 5000 cals a day of protein and fat (no carbs) he would not put on weight and if he were eating his 'needed' 3000 cals a day of (processed) carbs he would put on weight. Check out Kekwick & Pawan, Lancet 1956. x
FACEPALM!!!
maccajoe 3 months ago
stupid bitch
marcosdelapinta 3 months ago
is this video a fucking troll? lol try telling pro bbers/fitness models that caloric deficits don't work
Emperorsephs 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you stupid fucking bitch.
nosracoon 3 months ago
if people would have actually listened to calorie counting advice they would'nt be so fucking fat, I've lost 50lbs through a 500 kcal deficit doing little to no exercise. you are cancer get off the internet.
dar13y 3 months ago
Why don't dave just cut 500 below his maitenance of 3k calories, leaving him to eat 2.5k calories?
BeanieBroadcast 3 months ago
Wait, so if dave still consumes more calories than he "needs" he won't lose weight, but calorie theory at the same time is wrong? 10/10 for making me comment
dgriffiths89 3 months ago
^ that guy said it, the laws of thermodynamics. Calories are energy
Fat is stored energy, Fat is stored calories
HOW DO I BURN STORED ENERGY?!?"?"?
Well if I eat less calories than my body burns, where will I get the extra calories to burn guize?!?!?! I KNOW FROM THE STORED FAT.
GODDAMIT WOMAN ARE YOU DISABLED? just because "this advice has been around and people aren't following it and getting fatter anyway" doesn't mean it is wrong. LRN2THERMODYNAMICS
utukk 3 months ago 2
You are the most stupid person I've ever seen in my fucking life. I hope you legitimately die this instant.
ps. you are 1 ugly motherfucker
XenuBlud 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
shut the fuck up stupid woman
Toobmeal 3 months ago
Wow, if you were a real scientist you would be fired within the first 3 minutes. Your rant in the whole first minute is absolutely wrong. You are not showing any evidence that the spread of two different things are interrelated. Learn the scientific method and come back with some real proof, not some fad diet to make you a bit of money and give you you're 15 minutes of fame.
Il0veToFU 3 months ago 3
what are your credentials that make you qualified to be spouting off information that's contrary to that given by the FDA?
agreed, simple calorie in < calorie out doesn't work for SOME people.
but to say that calorie counting isn't the best way to lose weight for MANY people is simply wrong. I know people that have lost huge amounts of weight by eating less and exercising, NOT by just cutting carbs. lrn2thermodynamics.
OHMAHGAWDz 3 months ago 9
Apparently the rules of physics and chemistry don't apply to fat people...
FieroRumor 3 months ago 3
i can't believe what i am watching. Like seriously. This is more retarded than that person who said 'if god doesn't exist, who wrote the bible?'.
thelongsdaleguy 3 months ago 3
what a horrible video, i love how shes trying to disprove chemistry. fat is your body's way of storing calories. if you take in more calories than you need those are stored as fat, if you take in less than you eat you fat deposits are tapped to make up for the deficit. she doesn't even understand that when the it says 500 calories less it means 500 calories less than what your body needs not how much you regularly consume. my favorite is how she says men lose more weight, that's a real myth.
rooflpoofles 3 months ago 14
Zoe Harcombe -Author no other credentials cited stopped listening here
DixieNormas07 3 months ago 2
I wouldn't say calories is not the answer - that implies that energy consumption is not a factor.
What I might say is that for some individuals who are accustomed to certain responses to caloric deficit, that sufficient caloric deficit to lose weight at a noticeable rate is difficult to maintain, because a slight caloric deficit causes disproportionate response in satiety.
That said, calorie in < calorie out does eventually cause noticeable mass loss.
piecharthosen 3 months ago
i laughed while watchin' this i mean its so funny what 'MAD' advice we get about calories! it was funny how zoe made total sense! i really love her videos she is awesome! :D
exposedtrueself15 9 months ago
@UKMark1997 If U think the calorie deficit formula does work Please can u prove it!? Whats The Science Behind It? Zoe wrote to goverment buddies that use this(mad) formula and asked for a proof!! NONE of em could!!! So Please wil ya?? Thanks a lot!!!
mokugin81 11 months ago
she is right. i increase my calories(fat/prot) and ruduce my carbs(to 50-100 daily) and lose weight(body fat) for summer time.
modified Atkins Diet works works for me.
im thinking about buying your book Ms. Harcombe.
topheramazz 1 year ago
iv been fat all my life and it got really bad 330 pounds
then i whent on the atkins diet a diet of like 65% fat , 30% protein , 5% carbs and with exercise i lost 150 pounds of fat and gained 60 pounds of muscle
im now 240 pounds and your right counting calories is stupid i dont count calories at all i eat as much food as i want as long as its none of the bad carbs :)
VeoKenKs 2 years ago
Hi VeoKenKs - well done! Great diagnosis and great job choosing something that works for you. I'm a big fan of the real food bit of Atkins - I don't like the processed low carb bars & things giving us rubbish in a different way. If we all base our diet on meat, fish, eggs, dairy products, salads and vegetables (for me - sal & veg should be UNlimited), but I do understand the rationale behind this. Fruit and whole grains should then be eaten with caution!
Keep eating lots & losing weight! x
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago
It is true that blanket advice of 'Eat 500 cals less per day' will not lead to regular weight loss of 1lb per week for a lot of people for various reasons e.g.they're not eating at maintenance levels to start with, their energy output might downregulate to some extent due to a calorie deficit, they may expend less calories through activity through lethargy etc. But this doesn't mean that the basic 3500 cals theory is wrong.
UKMark1977 1 year ago
It just means that for various reasons either the input or output side of the calorie balance equation can change and so you may not ACTUALLY be achieving the calorie deficit you think you are theoretically. Also, dieting doesn't 'damage' metabolic rate permanently, only a small amount due to less energy output due to the lower bodyweight. But this will be balanced by an equivalent reduction in appetite.
UKMark1977 1 year ago
The low success rate of dieting is not due to a failure of dieting methods per se, simply that people who have got fat in the first place find it hard to permanently leave behind the eating habits or sedentary habits that got them there in the first place. Many people do manage to diet and keep weight off long term through making regular exercise a part of their lives.
UKMark1977 1 year ago
I await with interest to see if you are able to provide any figures that show a higher success rate with your program. On your forums I see a lot of people who struggle to stick to your program or are achieving no or little weight loss success, and of course no one is able to give adequate help to them to explain their lack of success as you have no alternative theory to explain fat loss having dismissed the calorie theory. I see no evidence that your program is getting superior results.
UKMark1977 1 year ago
@VeoKenKs you did not gain 60 pounds of muscle you idiot
Wilsondano1 3 months ago 3
@VeoKenKs 60lbs of muscle? You best be trollin...
Elle2142 3 months ago
@VeoKenKs 60 pounds of muscle?>???? da fuck
maccajoe 3 months ago
Zoe, I never count calories. For years I've eaten all the meats, vegetables and some fresh citrus fruits that I instinctively want. I've been able to maintain ~ 5% to 8% body fat for over a decade (I'm a male). What's interesting is that I was a heavily overweight person growing up. Again, I never count calories. I just eat wholesome, unaltered foods.
buzzkilling 2 years ago
Hello again! Well done you for this - I see so many clients and I ask them when their weight problem first started and I have yet to meet someone who didn't say "When I started my first calorie restricted diet/went to Weight Watchers for the first time" etc.
It starts the body down that never ending spiral of being hungry, wanting to eat more and to do less - the exact opposite of what eating less tries to do!
Eat better - it's the only way - as a fit guy like you knows!
Best wishes - Zoe
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago
Hi Zoe. You say that the government advice is to "Reduce your intake by 3,500 calories to lose a pound of fat." It says "Whenever we eat more than our body needs, we put on weight" and "Ideally, you need to eat 500-600 calories FEWER THAN YOUR DAILY CALORIE NEEDS in order to lose a healthy 0.5kg/1lb per week" So for Dave to lose a pound in a week he would need 500 kcal a day fewer than 3,000. I didn't do maths at Cambridge, but I make that 2,500 kcal a day. Methinks your argument is flawed!
m2gym 2 years ago
Hi there - you're right! According to the calorie theory (which I don't believe) the government should have said Dave should eat 500 cals a day less than he needs. Several official references to this formula forget the 'deficit' bit and just say 'eat less' - not 'eat less than you need'. I'm having a bit of a pop at them not even getting their own advice right. Far more serious is that I have asked 6 official sources where is the evidence for this 3500 thing and they have no idea! Zoe x
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago
Of course if Dave is eating many more calories than he needs he's not going to lose weight, if one wants to lose a pound a week you need to eat -500 calories of your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). Also the whole car example is incorrect, the fat we have stored is energy, if we eat with a calorie deficit we get the rest from the fat, we still need food though for nutrients which are not stored in fat. So starving is bad, but eating less is good, once the goal is reached than you eat what's needed.
solrak6789 2 years ago
well i have strictly counting calories for everything that i eat, and not only that, but i make sure that most of those calories come from whole foods, and things like that, and I have lost plenty of weight....so in my opinion CALORIE COUNTING WORKS!!!!!! of course if you eat nothing but mcdonalds and count calories, or cookies all day then of course it's going to be harder...so just count calories, and make sure those calories just come from good whole foods and you will be alright
metallicat61003 2 years ago
Hi there - I sincerely hope you are one of the c. 5% of people who lose weight on a low calorie diet and keep it off. You are very likely to have slowed your metabolism and got your body used to needing fewer calories, which means you may need to eat very little for the rest of your life to stay at this weight. You may also have picked up the 3 conditions described in the book (and other VT's) and start getting cravings. I would rather eat more personally!
Many thanks for the comment - Zoe
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago
i dont think so.I do alot of cardio during the day so then whatever calories I burn doing the cardio i end up eating that much more...alot of times I find it hard to even eat the number of calories i have set for myself, so I am in no way starving myself. Not even close to it in fact...just got done eating 3 full chicken breasts and a salad, and i still got about 800 calories left for the day.of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I really do believe that this method has worked wonders!
metallicat61003 2 years ago
So it dont matter how many calories i intake as long as im eating proteins n vegs? can i eat like 3pieces of grilled chicken instead of 2 n not worry? or is there a limit? im so confused as i know the right foods i just dont know the portions or which not to eat n when
ima69bish 2 years ago
What you're saying is true, although you appear just to be quoting statistics, e.g the outbreak of obesity linked to counting calories. I believe this is mostly due to people failing their calorie controlled diets and eating more.
Also, I believe you have to eat 3500 less than your required daily intake to lose a pound of fat. So Dave will not lose weight but continue to gain it. But he will be gaining 2lb less fat than he was previously.
cassandrine 2 years ago
Hi! Thanks so much for your thought provoking comment.
Since my last videos all I've been doing is research. The UK Government statistics state we were eating 2290 calories per person per day in 1975 and 1690 in 1999. Applying the 3500 calorie 'rule', each person should have LOST 62.6lbs during that time. Instead obesity increased 6X. So we are not falling off our diets and eating more - we are eating lots less and getting fatter. It must be WHAT we eat , not how much, that counts. Zoe x
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago
Me again - on the Dave thing - I don't believe that Dave would have been gaining 4lbs every week (i.e. 208lbs every year). I am in the group (and there are a few writing in obesity journals) that believes it is WHAT we eat, not how much, that counts. I believe that if Dave were eating 5000 cals a day of protein and fat (no carbs) he would not put on weight and if he were eating his 'needed' 3000 cals a day of (processed) carbs he would put on weight. Check out Kekwick & Pawan, Lancet 1956. x
ZoeHarcombe 2 years ago